Documents found
-
167.More information
The Agreement between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America For cooperation in the examination of refugee status claims from nationals of third countries, also known as the Safe Third Country Agreement, recently underwent a significant change with the entry into force of its Additional Protocol in March 2023. This Protocol led to a strengthening of the Canada-U.S. border, virtually eliminating any crossing point that escaped the joint management of asylum claims between the two countries, with the exception of a 14-day delay. This article offers a first legal analysis of the changes that took place at the Canada-U.S. border, examining the situation six months after these modifications. Based on a preliminary legal and empirical analysis of those changes, the authors found that the Canadian government's objective seemed to lie in reducing the number of asylum claims lodged by migrants crossing the Canada-U.S. border irregularly. These elements highlight the complex dynamics influencing asylum and migration policy at the Canada-U.S. border.
-
168.More information
The Canadian healthcare system has a rich history of using public funds for medically necessary hospital and physician services, legislated by the Canada Health Act (CHA). Overlapping with this history is the fight for reproductive rights which culminated in the decriminalization of abortion in 1988. Provincial and territorial governments must ensure that residents have “reasonable access” to health services deemed “medically necessary” as per the CHA principle of accessibility; the federal government holds the authority to withhold funding to sub-national governments if violated. We demonstrate that sufficient policy and legislative evidence exists to support abortion as a medically necessary procedure in Canada. We further argue that, as a medically necessary health service, the inequitable landscape of abortion access across Canada requires vast improvements to fulfil the “accessibility” principle. Systemic and geographical barriers, a lack of culturally informed care, unwilling providers, and anti-choice influences complicate abortion access. Though accessibility has been broadened with the introduction of Mifegymiso — the gold standard for medical abortion — this has not solved the problem of access. In this paper, we argue that classifying a procedure as medically necessary, in this case abortion, requires active and sustained policy action to improve equitable access and remove barriers to care. We justify the special status we give abortion through utilitarian and justice reasons, and due to the unique barriers to care faced by patients seeking abortions.
Keywords: abortion, medical necessity, health policy, Canada Health Act, access to care, reproductive health, avortement, nécessité médicale, politique de santé, loi canadienne sur la santé, accès aux soins, santé reproductive